Yo_Lover

Let's clear up something about the draft.

142 posts in this topic

13 minutes ago, Vandy said:

Coming off a bottom 5 league defense year? No sir, that won’t be a good draft. At all. 

 

Exactly.  We added 2 average starting OL in the offseason already.  If all we did with first 3 rounds of the draft is add 2 more average OL then I’d call it a failure of an offseason.  Defense needed some TLC

Vandy and MD-FalconFan13 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Vandy said:

Coming off a bottom 5 league defense year? No sir, that won’t be “a very good draft”. At all. 

 

I guess DQ and TD are banking on us going back to our 2017 rank with a healthy roster and guys like Oliver and Olukun taking a positive step forward as the reason for not drafting a lot of defensive players this year. That and the fact that the O-line was just THAT BAD. 

Don't know what we're gonna do about the DE position though, other than hope DQ has an Infinity Gauntlet stashed somewhere.

Vandy likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Falconsin2012 said:

Exactly.  We added 2 average starting OL in the offseason already.  If all we did with first 3 rounds of the draft is add 2 more average OL then I’d call it a failure of an offseason.  Defense needed some TLC

We need both Lindstrom and McGary to be above average to great. They have talent, but my concern is that it takes even veteran O-Lines time to gel and often rookie O-Linemen struggle early before finding their footing. We're going to probably be asking 2 rookie O-Linemen to come in and play at a high level immediately.

If they don't it will be very hard to justify using our first 3 picks of the draft on them especially after spending the majority of our FA money on the O-Line. Compounding this is the fact we haven't locked up Grady, Deion Jones and Vic Beasley, so they are essentially all on 1 year deals. 

If the O-Line plays well the FO will look like geniuses. If not, the critics voices will get to the point they can no longer be ignored by Blank. This is a very big season for the Quinn and company. I'd say it's make or break. 

FalconsIn2020 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Vandy said:

Coming off a bottom 5 league defense year? No sir, that won’t be “a very good draft”. At all. 

 

no context to your "bottom 5 defense".   C'mon Vandy - this would be analysis I would expect from some national writer that doesn't follow the Falcons.  To ignore the #1 and the #2 QBs of our defense being gone for most(Deion Jones) and all(Rico Allen) of the year along with our enforcer(Keanu Neal) in the secondary and say "Bottom 5 defense" - is blurring the lines purposely.   I know you know the context - why are you ignoring it here?

Furthermore,  another bone to pick w/ you here - to say  'No sir, that wono't be a "very good draft". At all' - also a misguided statement.   If the players drafted play well and pan out - it will be a GREAT DRAFT - regardless of it didn't contain your preferred defenders.    Whether a draft is GREAT or VERY GOOD or "Not a very good draft at all" - isn't dependent on the positions taken but the players that were drafted.   C'mon Vandy, you are better than this post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/26/2019 at 11:45 PM, Falconsin2012 said:

Your logic is too sound for me to counter.  But I can still be annoyed about that 3rd pick, dangit...lol.

I don’t care what anyone says, too 100 picks are gold

fairly certain you meant to say "two".

We didn't forfeit TWO top 100 picks - we forfeited ONE in the trade.  

This was my bone of contention, 2012.   It's all good but just gets me crazy when people overstate what was given for a trade-up - and it is usually stated similar to the way you said so here - maybe not what you meant to say - but you did say it.

No worries....it's all good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, g-dawg said:

no context to your "bottom 5 defense".   C'mon Vandy - this would be analysis I would expect from some national writer that doesn't follow the Falcons.  To ignore the #1 and the #2 QBs of our defense being gone for most(Deion Jones) and all(Rico Allen) of the year along with our enforcer(Keanu Neal) in the secondary and say "Bottom 5 defense" - is blurring the lines purposely.   I know you know the context - why are you ignoring it here?

Furthermore,  another bone to pick w/ you here - to say  'No sir, that wono't be a "very good draft". At all' - also a misguided statement.   If the players drafted play well and pan out - it will be a GREAT DRAFT - regardless of it didn't contain your preferred defenders.    Whether a draft is GREAT or VERY GOOD or "Not a very good draft at all" - isn't dependent on the positions taken but the players that were drafted.   C'mon Vandy, you are better than this post.

A question.  So if this draft produces 2 quality starters you’d consider it a very good draft, right?

Lets say those starters are Ollison and Sheffield at NB.  Let’s also say McGary & Lindstrom are worse than Sam Baker.  Is it still a good draft?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, g-dawg said:

fairly certain you meant to say "two".

We didn't forfeit TWO top 100 picks - we forfeited ONE in the trade.  

This was my bone of contention, 2012.   It's all good but just gets me crazy when people overstate what was given for a trade-up - and it is usually stated similar to the way you said so here - maybe not what you meant to say - but you did say it.

No worries....it's all good.

No, top 100 picks.  I’m not stupid.  I know we sacrificed a 3rd round pick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Falconsin2012 said:

A question.  So if this draft produces 2 quality starters you’d consider it a very good draft, right?

Lets say those starters are Ollison and Sheffield at NB.  Let’s also say McGary & Lindstrom are worse than Sam Baker.  Is it still a good draft?

depends on if Ollison and Sheffield were major stars or not.

NO - if Lindstrom and McGary were busts - I would have a problem w/ this draft.  You always want to hit on the 1st rounders - If we went 1-2 and we hit big on at least 1-2 others, still would be a great draft.    If we missed on both 1st rounders - that would be NOT GOOD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Falconsin2012 said:

No, top 100 picks.  I’m not stupid.  I know we sacrificed a 3rd round pick

that's fine - not what you said though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, g-dawg said:

that's fine - not what you said though.

It is...you can tell cause I said I can still be annoyed about the 3rd rd pick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Falconsin2012 said:

It is...

"too(2) 100 picks are gold"

Why did you say that?  your words my friend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/26/2019 at 7:43 PM, Knight of God said:

We usually pick that ONE GUY that I don’t want.

I know you like that Pitt RB huh? What's been up KOG?

Knight of God likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, g-dawg said:

"too(2) 100 picks are gold"

Why did you say that?  your words my friend.

What makes more sense...too 100 pick  or top 100 pick....especially when the sentence before I clearly say the 3rd rd pick was what bothered me.

But we are arguing semantics.  Who cares

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, g-dawg said:

"too(2) 100 picks are gold"

Why did you say that?  your words my friend.

He’s saying he meant top not too. O and p right next to each other, mistype 

FalconsIn2020 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Falconsin2012 said:

What makes more sense...too 100 pick  or top 100 pick....especially when the sentence before I clearly say the 3rd rd pick was what bothered me.

But we are arguing semantics.  Who cares

ok....I see it now.  misspelling has consequences :D - please never misspell a word ever again on this board!

FalconsIn2020 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Falconsin2012 said:

A question.  So if this draft produces 2 quality starters you’d consider it a very good draft, right?

Lets say those starters are Ollison and Sheffield at NB.  Let’s also say McGary & Lindstrom are worse than Sam Baker.  Is it still a good draft?

You need to get behind this draft.   If it turns out bad in a few years, then you can say "i told ya so".....I know you are supporting picks but wary of the strategy - but let it go - let's all embrace the strategy for now.   We already have D-LED at AJC crapping on the strategy in his article today - and almost ever day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, g-dawg said:

You need to get behind this draft.   If it turns out bad in a few years, then you can say "i told ya so".....I know you are supporting picks but wary of the strategy - but let it go - let's all embrace the strategy for now.   We already have D-LED at AJC crapping on the strategy in his article today - and almost ever day.

I’m behind it.  I actually think it end up being a very solid draft long term.  I just dont think it helped us much next year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, g-dawg said:

You need to get behind this draft.   If it turns out bad in a few years, then you can say "i told ya so".....I know you are supporting picks but wary of the strategy - but let it go - let's all embrace the strategy for now.   We already have D-LED at AJC crapping on the strategy in his article today - and almost ever day.

Too many fans paint themselves as experts. In their minds, they're either Nostradamus or Bill Walsh. In 2016, people were feening on drafting Darren Lee or Su'a Cravens (among other exciting names). Well, we drafted Keanu Neal and Deion Jones at those two positions and TATF folded in on itself. Quinn and Piolitroff had no idea WTF they were doing. We could have had two better players, they said. Also, we could have traded for more picks and gotten both of them.

Four years later and Lee has been traded and Cravens has played a grand total of 16 games for two teams. He had three total starts and a whole year off between seasons, too. We need to put our expectations into perspective. We (fans) don't conduct interviews with players, their coaches, teachers, high school principals and local law enforcement. We don't have private investigators dig deep into red flags. We don't spend a penny traveling across the country to work them out. We have literally <5% of the whole picture, yet we can judge whether it's art or not by looking solely at the signature.

I can understand the hesitation to embrace a strategy that we didn't expect. Just can't understand obsessing over it for months (or years) like some of us do.

g-dawg, FalconsIn2020 and duckhoa like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Falconsin2012 said:

I’m behind it.  I actually think it end up being a very solid draft long term.  I just dont think it helped us much next year

you cannot chase "next year" through the draft - you build your team for the long haul and you let the chips fall where they may.  Occasionally you will have a rookie play a huge role in a SB title but you pick players to play for your franchise for 4-10 years - not for what they do their rookie season.

"Build it and they will come".

FalconsIn2020 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, JayOzOne said:

Too many fans paint themselves as experts. In their minds, they're either Nostradamus or Bill Walsh. In 2016, people were feening on drafting Darren Lee or Su'a Cravens (among other exciting names). Well, we drafted Keanu Neal and Deion Jones at those two positions and TATF folded in on itself. Quinn and Piolitroff had no idea WTF they were doing. We could have had two better players, they said. Also, we could have traded for more picks and gotten both of them.

Four years later and Lee has been traded and Cravens has played a grand total of 16 games for two teams. He had three total starts and a whole year off between seasons, too. We need to put our expectations into perspective. We (fans) don't conduct interviews with players, their coaches, teachers, high school principals and local law enforcement. We don't have private investigators dig deep into red flags. We don't spend a penny traveling across the country to work them out. We have literally <5% of the whole picture, yet we can judge whether it's art or not by looking solely at the signature.

I can understand the hesitation to embrace a strategy that we didn't expect. Just can't understand obsessing over it for months (or years) like some of us do.

yep - the draft is now over a month old.   Time to let the gripes go.  Be excited that we have an offensive line with an infusion of talent both young and old - and we now have depth with two legit bench players (whoever they may be - at this point TBD) that can come in, in case of injury and play OT or OG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, JayOzOne said:

Too many fans paint themselves as experts. In their minds, they're either Nostradamus or Bill Walsh. In 2016, people were feening on drafting Darren Lee or Su'a Cravens (among other exciting names). Well, we drafted Keanu Neal and Deion Jones at those two positions and TATF folded in on itself. Quinn and Piolitroff had no idea WTF they were doing. We could have had two better players, they said. Also, we could have traded for more picks and gotten both of them.

Four years later and Lee has been traded and Cravens has played a grand total of 16 games for two teams. He had three total starts and a whole year off between seasons, too. We need to put our expectations into perspective. We (fans) don't conduct interviews with players, their coaches, teachers, high school principals and local law enforcement. We don't have private investigators dig deep into red flags. We don't spend a penny traveling across the country to work them out. We have literally <5% of the whole picture, yet we can judge whether it's art or not by looking solely at the signature.

I can understand the hesitation to embrace a strategy that we didn't expect. Just can't understand obsessing over it for months (or years) like some of us do.

Not saying you are addressing this to me.  I certainly don’t consider myself an expert on anything football related. 

But it’s common sense to keep your top 100 draft capital.  I always hate trading away top 100 picks.  And we have done so in 6 of 9 years.  

And while it’s just my opinion, our offense was still highly effective last year.  We added 2 starting OL already.  As such, it felt like the defense needed the attention

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, g-dawg said:

you cannot chase "next year" through the draft - you build your team for the long haul and you let the chips fall where they may.  Occasionally you will have a rookie play a huge role in a SB title but it's not exactly common.

"Build it and they will come".

I agree to a point.  This is a SB window so adding to a thin defense felt prudent.  2018 was also a SB window and we saw what limited depth resulted in

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Falconsin2012 said:

Not saying you are addressing this to me.  I certainly don’t consider myself an expert on anything football related. 

But it’s common sense to keep your top 100 draft capital.  I always hate trading away top 100 picks.  And we have done so in 6 of 9 years.  

And while it’s just my opinion, our offense was still highly effective last year.  We added 2 starting OL already.  As such, it felt like the defense needed the attention

the defense was down THREE crucial starters - two pro-bowl caliber and the third was the QB of the secondary and team leader.   While Rico isn't an all-star physically - he had a lot of responsibility in the defense making sure coverages were right and assignments and lining up players pre-snap.   To not acknowledge when talking about our "poor defense" last year - it's just not good analysis. if we added ZERO players in the draft defensively, we would have been better this year with those three players healthy and someone playing at least as good as Rocky Alford, who is being replaced because of his salary and poor play.

As to the offense, it was good passing but we were so very imbalanced and Matt took way too many hits.  When Matt goes down, if he goes down - our season is toast.   We won't win 6 games if Matt went down in the first game.   The offensive line had two major investments in the last 12 years - and it just so happens those are the only two good players we had on the offensive line.

FalconsIn2020 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Falconsin2012 said:

Not saying you are addressing this to me.  I certainly don’t consider myself an expert on anything football related. 

But it’s common sense to keep your top 100 draft capital.  I always hate trading away top 100 picks.  And we have done so in 6 of 9 years.  

And while it’s just my opinion, our offense was still highly effective last year.  We added 2 starting OL already.  As such, it felt like the defense needed the attention

I wasn't addressing you. At least not specifically or because of anything that you've said here. But in spite of having a lot of yards, we were predictable last year. Ryan was put in position to pass and a QB in his mid-30s is not going to survive long by being sacked 42 times. And we have a 100 million guaranteed reasons to make sure he survives. So I'll disagree with your contention that we had a highly effective offense last year. If total yards are all that you're considering, then you have a point. But if getting those yards when you need them is what matters, then our efficiency was nowhere close to where it needed to be.

If our offensive line can cut those sacks in half and open up running lanes for another 25 yards per game, then we'll have a top 10 defense almost by default. You're entitled to your opinion though.

duckhoa and FalconsIn2020 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Falconsin2012 said:

I agree to a point.  This is a SB window so adding to a thin defense felt prudent.  2018 was also a SB window and we saw what limited depth resulted in

both lines of scrimmage need draft capital - rather than split the difference and draft one OL and one DL early - we went OL/OL.   The way the board broke on draft day solidified the strategy (selections made).   Personally, I see DL as riskier picks and easier to miss on.   I also don't see difference makers if they don't have special passrush skills.  Sometimes passrush at college level doesn't translate to NFL levels.

I see Lindstrom/McGary as both fairly high floor and not low ceiling guys.   If both these guys open up the run game and if McGary can consistently hold the edge in pass pro - this will really open up the offense.   If we can gain 2-3 minutes average of TOP (time of possession) per game then this contributes to the overall defense as well.-

In the early era of the Smitty/Dimitroff regime - one of the main reasons our defense ranked at least OK statistically was because we were averaging 36-37 minutes TOP per game which led to defense only being on the field for 23-24 minutes.   That's huge if we can get to that point again.

duckhoa likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now